linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] media: iris: Introduce vpu ops for vpu4 with necessary hooks

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <cc6e1fdd-f15f-4d31-b2c6-1fb59938786c@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 12:53:25 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Dikshita Agarwal <dikshita.agarwal@....qualcomm.com>,
 Vikash Garodia <vikash.garodia@....qualcomm.com>,
 Bryan O'Donoghue <bod@...nel.org>
Cc: Abhinav Kumar <abhinav.kumar@...ux.dev>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Vishnu Reddy <busanna.reddy@....qualcomm.com>,
 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
 Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] media: iris: Introduce vpu ops for vpu4 with
 necessary hooks

On 16/01/2026 12:30, Dikshita Agarwal wrote:
>>
>> I think this review timeline is final argument for Vikash to stop
>> pushing such narratives and complains, because your review is expected
>> to be BEFORE the maintainer upper in the upstream flow.
> 
> Since these changes were posted by Vikash, who is a co‑maintainer of this
> driver, I initially waited for reviews from other community members before
> adding my own tags. We did receive review comments on most of the patches,

This is not how it works.

> and I intentionally held back my Reviewed-by tags to allow space for
> broader feedback.
> 
> Now that the series has been on the mailing list for about a month without
> any remaining open comments, I have gone ahead and reviewed the patches,
You as a driver maintainer should review within few days, week maximum.
Not a month. And IT IS DOCUMENTED.

You do not need to wait for anyone in the community for performing your
side of driver review. Performing review after one month is not really
responsible, but the only party you affect is your own team, so sure, I
don't mind.

But DO NOT apply such rule of waiting months for the rest of the community.

Please read Documentation/maintainer/feature-and-driver-maintainers.rst
which gives you clear guidelines what is expected, including the
timeline. If you disagree and claim Iris is maintained by you in
weeks-time (one month), that rule will apply to all of us, entire
community and also to Bryan - we all can look at patches to Iris within
that timeframe.


Best regards,
Krzysztof